Tuesday, April 01, 2008


I have to admit I was disappointed when I watched this clip called Fitna. I had heard so much about the so long awaited film from that Dutch politician Geert Wilders, or better described as “freedon of speech” fighter. I’d heard so much about how that “fighter” was finaly about to expose the terror in the Quran. The film did not live to reach my expectation. Lame is the least to be described as.

Having said that and after reading lots of comments and discussions about the “extremely informative" film, as described by so many people on the internet who praised the freedom of speech, I decided, that I, too, wanna embrace the “freedom of speech” dogma and declare myself a devout fighter under its holy name.

My first mission is to “expose” all texts that call for death upon others. The first “verses” I got my hands on were from the US constitution that clearly indicates under chapter 18:

“….(b) A person who conspires to commit an offense, ….. shall be punished by death…”
And it gets better here:

“(d)…. If two or more persons conspire kidnap a Member of Congress or a
Member-of-Congress-elect ...shall be punished by death….”

So I here call for the ban of the US constitution and ask the "civilized" American to liberate themselves from this “hatred and uncivilized” rules to which they are bound to obey.

Alright, enough what this crap already! People who “oppose” the US, will cheer for the above excerpts and may even praise me for this discovery….just like my fellow “freedom of speech” fighters did to Mr. Wilders. Other people however, who were not blessed with ignorance, will dig further and find out that I simply cut and pasted “specific” parts of the US constitution that serve my goal, in this case, spreading hatred against Americans. To those, I salute you.

Believe it or not, so many people who have watched the film “Fitna” and applauded and cheered to the guy behind it, know nothing about the freedom of speech, even more, they are as far as anybody can be from being civilized.

I’m going to list the Quranic verses that Mr. Wilders used to demonstrate that Quran calls for terrorism.
Before I start, I need to mention that the translation he used is not accurate and somehow modified to fit his purpose", but that is the least he did.

He started with Surah 8, Verse 60 that reads:

“Make ready for them all thou canst of (armed) force and of horses tethered,
that thereby ye may dismay the enemy of Allah and your enemy, and others beside
them whom ye know not. Allah knoweth them. Whatsoever ye spend in the way of
Allah it will be repaid to you in full, and ye will not be wronged. (60) “

Then he goes on showing photos of September 11th crime. Well, many “civilized” people don’t know that the continuation of that verse reads:

“And if they incline to peace, incline thou also to it, and trust in
For those interested in knowing, the part of the Quranic verse
is teaching about “Rules of Engagements” in the times of war.

The second verse he used, Surah 4, verse 56, reads:
“ Lo! Those who disbelieve Our revelations, We shall expose them to the Fire. As
often as their skins are consumed We shall exchange them for fresh skins that
they may taste the torment. Lo! Allah is ever Mighty, Wise. “

Although the verse is clear and self-explanatory as it describes the punishment that GOD will bring upon those who disbelieve in him. It has in no why any teaching or instruction to the followers. Just plain narrative of what is going to happen in the Judgment Day. I doubt that the “God” of the Old Testament hasn’t touched on the subject…many times.

The third verse is the most interesting one, as he omitted words that don’t serve his aim from the same verse. This verse is Surah 47, verse 4 and in the film it reads:

“Therefore, when ye meet the unbelievers, smite at their necks and when ye have
caused a bloodbath among them....bind a bond firmly on them....”

Whereas the verse actually reads:

“Now when ye meet in battle those who disbelieve, then it is smiting of the
necks until, when ye have routed them, then making fast of bonds; and afterward
either grace or ransom till the war lay down its burdens. ”

Like if he is ever confronted with this, I believe his response will be as deep as: “Ooopsi”.

Moving on to his next verse, Surah 8, verse 39, which reads:

“They long that ye should disbelieve even as they disbelieve, that ye may be
upon a level (with them). So choose not friends from them till they forsake
their homes in the way of Allah; if they turn back (to enmity) then take them
and kill them wherever ye find them, and choose no friend nor hper from among
them, (89)”

I guess he got a phone call while working on this epic film so he totally forgot to put the continuation of that verse, Surah 4, verse 90, which reads:

Except those who seek refuge with a people between whom and you there is a
, or (those who) come unto you because their hearts forbid them to make
war on you or make war on their own folk
. Had Allah willed He could have given
them power over you so that assuredly they would have fought you. So, if they
hold aloof from you and wage not war against you and offer you peace, Allah
alloweth you no way against them
. (90)

Simply put, if they fight you, fight them back, if they declare war against you, do the same. If they offer peace, reciprocate! What’s so hard to understand about this?

The last verse he used, Surah 8 Verse 39, reads according to him:

“Fight them until there is no dissension and the religion is entirely Allah's"

While the verse actually reads:

“And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is all for Allah. But
if they cease, then lo! Allah is Seer of what they do.”

Clear I guess, reciprocate when you are under persecution until they stop persecuting you!

Of course, he quoted many “radicals” Muslims throughout the film to support his falsification of the Quran. I’m pretty much sure that if one’s needs to get radical and racist remarks, probably with the exception of the Citizen of Utopia, a handful of them can be spotted within each and every society.

Last word:
I believe that faith does not need to be defended. The aim of my post is not to defend, but rather to clarify.

By the way, for those who don’t know Arabic, Fitna in an Arabic word that means “Creating division and hatred leading to commotion”. I had to admit that no other title could do a better job describing the content of this film.


DUBAI JAZZ said...

great work Ihsan, yeslamo eydayk.

Wassim said...

I wasn't sure where you were going with all that at first but by the time I reached the end it became clear. Well done, great post.

Sarah said...

Very nice, I haven't seen fitna but thanks for the clarification! I will point people toward your post if anyone asks me about the the film...

Zainol Abideen said...

Assalamualaikum Brother,

Jazakallah for your clear perspective in handling the myopic and sinister view of the Dutch hatemonger.

I will refer my readers to read this post of yours.

May Allah SWT bless you for this.


Wassalamualaikum wr wb.

Scott said...

Sir, I would like to point out that while you interpret the quoted verses in context to mean God's punishment of wrongdoers, the extremists as featured in Wilders' film interpret them in a wholly different manner.

To wit, they believe that the duty falls on them to punish the wrongdoers in this world - according to their definition of 'punish' and 'wrongdoer', which to some means every non-Muslim.


It would be quite excellent (and frankly, very surprising) if moderate Muslims would spend half as much time convincing extremist Muslims that Islam is a religion of peace as they do trying to convince non-Muslims.

It is simply ineffective when a moderate says "These Koranic verses do not call for violence" and the next second an extremist quotes those same verses, only with a bomb attached.

If you could kindly debate the extremists out of their violent misinterpretation, Wilders' film would lose much of its material and basically be a 30-second slideshow of Koranic verses.


salam, brother,

thank you for the clarification.

i have not watched the film and don't wish to.

and to Scott: those committing the violence were doing so, not in the name of Islam. They were "EXTREMISTS" and they happened to be Muslims. If they could've uttered other verses, I'm sure they would.
And why did these "extremists" commit such violence can only be understood by understanding the protacted middle-east crisis.

Ihsan said...


Let's say those described as "moderate" Muslims do debate the extremist and talk them out of carrying on with their "holy" attacks, will that mean deaths across the world will stop?Terror will seize to exist?

The trend of Islamic terrorist is only few years of age. Was the world a better and safer place before? Mind you Islam has been there for hundreds of years with the same Quran. Those verses that some people misinterpret them, have been there for 1400 years!

There is no such a thing as "moderate" Muslim and "Extremist" Muslim, there is only a normal person and a criminal. it's as simple as that. I doubt that there is a criminal who doesn't seek to justify his/her wrongdoings, in the case of those criminal in particular, they use religion. Add to that that religions is the best way to gain support, how do you think the European armies marched and committed massacres in the middle east during the crusades? They, the soldiers, didn't march for fame or rich, but for holy war, unlike their leaders who used religion to have the obedience and the "public opinion" needed for such a war. Things have been like that for ever.

So it's not a matter of interpretation of the Quranic verse and that's why I used the US constitution example, if someone is seeking terror and calls for death, they can find that anywhere. For now, we have those maniacs killing under the name of Islam. Before we had different kind of maniacs and in the future we will have some different.

Last but not least, I agree with you that Muslim leaders must spend more effort fighting the misinterpretation of faith, not that many of them aren't already doing so, but things are harder than what you think when politics is part of equation.

malaysianminx said...

elo Ihsan, thanks for such an informative post. I hope you dont mind, but i actually copied and pasted ur post unto mine, so as to share ur clarification with others.

Anonymous said...

Great post!
May Allah bless you and your family...

Hkengmacao said...

Apparently, you are knowledgeable with the Holy Qur'an. I watched Fitna and was keen to know whether such 'hate verses' exist in the Holy Qur'an. Thanks for clearing my doubts.

Apparently, a lot of Muslims do not know much about Holy Qur'an and start to get angry after knowing about Fitna. I believe many of them not even watch Fitna and yet can be angry over Geert Wilder. I have commented in Nuraina Samad's blog on this subject and even suggested to her to watch Fitna rather than to reach her judgement based on 'hear-say'. How I wish Muslims react to Fitna the way you did.

Bravo to you. Peace to all of us.

A true Malaysian said...


I fully agree with you on your follow-up comments, ie:-

"Last but not least, I agree with you that Muslim leaders must spend more effort fighting the misinterpretation of faith, not that many of them aren't already doing so, but things are harder than what you think when politics is part of equation."

I have the same opinion that politician should not drag religions into politics and government. Religions should be left alone to all of us to practice peacefully.

You can read more about my thoughts in http://hsudarren.wordpress.com/2008/04/01/barisan-vs-pakatan/

Anonymous said...

Scott, the problem is that : in Islam we don't have such a 'highest power' who rules and owned the Holy Qur'an (like The Pope/Vatican; who owned the 'right or wrong' of the Catholic Bibble/Catholic's way of life). There's no HIGHEST COUNCIL who has the only right to translate the Holy Qur'an! No one has THE HIGHEST POWER among others in the way to say 'MY TRANSLATING IS MORE ABSOLUT THAN YOURS'! In Islam we SIMPLY OWN our own power to read/translated/interpreted/manifested every single line in Qur'an based on the Qur'an it's self. So that's way when you joint in such a horrible & extremist teacher/leader you'll ended as one even worse! So does vice versa. I agreed with Ihsan, that if someone looking for some terrors, then he would justify it in about everything, including the most powerfull thing : religion!(same as the Ducth congressman did, justify his belive about Islam in every aspect just to meet his envy & hate!, don't you think?

Dhamirah Sakinah said...

thank you and thank you for the info. May I put it on my blog, so everyone can read the article. thanks again.
May Allah bless you

Cobber said...

I'm neither a Muslim or a Malaysian (I'm Australian)but I found your post clear and informative. Well done!
It is my understanding that Islam is not a faith of violence in itself but understands the right of self defence. There is nothing wrong with this.
Yes, there are extremists who claim to be Muslim. Perhaps some of them even believe it but anyone who has studied history knows of the bloody background of Christianity.
Extremism is not, never was and never will be a hallmark of Islam any more than it is the hallmark of any other religion but it is possible for those with a desire for power to use a religion as a justification for their actions. It is they who are responsible, not the people they claim to represent.
Among these I would include the people responsible for Fitna. Their motive is entirely commercial and they have no thought for the damage they may cause. They are to be condemned.